Choosing a new laptop with optimally performing USB. Advice?

olav

Hi there,

I have used an older Asus S400 as imaging laptop, and need a second one anyway. I have the camera plugged to a said USB3 port, but for this case the "ASICamera Setup V6.0.2.16" is reporting "via USB2" for my ASI1600MM-Cool. Guess Asus didn't get the laptop port up to speed after all.

As I'm also thinking of one or two planetary cameras, I'm in for a new dedicated imaging laptop.

Something I should look for in the spec, that will make proper USB-speed more likely?

Laptop models to go after, and what to avoid?

Finally, is there a way to test USB3-ports easily and, well, accurately?

Thanks :)

merlin66

Olaf,

I've just gone through a similar exercise....

I want to use the ASI174MM at VERY high frame rates on a spectroheliograph application.

After much research I found the MSI gaming machines to meet the brief.

MSI Cx62 6QD - i7, 16 Gb memory, 500Gb SSD drive with 1Tb SATA, two USB3 ports (but the other USB2 also seems to have a USB3 driver!)

https://www.msi.com/Laptop/CX62-6QD.html#hero-overview

This is a FAST machine.

olav

Thanks Merlin.

So I guess there's more to it than just the USB3-port alone..

I'm trying to have the imaging laptops a bit less expensive, since they will do little more other useful stuff apart from "being remoted".

But at least one of the better i5 processors, 8GB RAM, and a fast writing disk.

jsmithsd

Olav,

I have a Dell Latitude E6540 laptop with three USB3 ports running Windows 7 Professional. 16GB RAM, quad core Intel i7-4610M @ 3.00 GHz CPU, and 225 GB SSD.

It works great with the following ZWO cameras:

120MM USB2

174MM USB3

178MM-cool USB3

I get the max frame rates that Sam advertises for the cameras.

Jason.

tgmorris99

I've got a lowly HP X360 13-s020nr (i3-5010U, 4GB RAM) which I upgraded with an Samsung 850 EVO SSD and it will capture full frame full rate from my ASI224MC without any problems. It can do post processing but I normally offload that to my desktop. Heck, it will capture full frame full rate from my ASI1600MC-C as well though I have no need for it to do that. I picked the HP up on sale for ~$300 not including the SSD upgrade a little over a year ago.

I also have a current generation compute stick (Atom x5-Z8300, 2GB RAM) which I remote into using RDP and use for DSO work and it will capture full rate at 640x480 when writing to a slow external SSD. It would likely do higher resolutions but I don't have a decent external SSD to test with :) - I'm guessing a high end compute stick (with an m3 or m5 processor) could capture full frame full rate with a decent SSD instead of the Patriot Spark I picked up during a fire sale.

It really depends on if the laptop is supposed to do everything or just the capture part. If it's just the capture then the amount of memory is not as important as the write speed if it's going to be dedicated for solar system imaging.

ETA - I realized I hadn't turned on write caching on the SSD. With write caching enable the compute stick will do 1024x768 at full rate with an occasional dropped frame using the ASI224MC. At 60 fps and 800x600 it's solid. Just something else to consider.

olav

Thanks all, for your replies with helpful details.

Several successful setups in a broad range of cost confirms what we already suspected, that the software and hardware driving the USB-port, plus the disk write speed, are the essential factors when imaging with high frame rates. Not so much the CPU/GPU/RAM/etc.

Not sure if you ever would encounter a (rather) new laptop with well performing USB 3/3.1 port that would not do the capture job well, due to weak processor etc. (disregarding image processing here)

Guess we could ask the makers of Firecapture/Sharpcap, if ever needed.

In the meantime I bought a new "medium class" Acer Swift SF314-51-56Y4 with i5-6200U, 8GB DDR4 RAM, 500GB SSD Liteon CV3-CE512 read/write 520/440 MB/s.

Got max framerates as announced for the 1600MMC and the 290MM, will post back if not also for the 174MM that will arrive soon.

Must say it is great to also have a USB-C port in laptops these days, very helpful for mobile imaging with an USB-C hub and support for USB Power Delivery, while running big USB 3.1 disks like they were fast internal ones.

Oh, did a quick check of today's for disk write speeds. Still, the SSDs for laptops, even the insanely expensive ones, do not have a fast write speed compared to conventional hard-drives.

I could get an SSD with 5% faster write speed for about 5 times the price. (some sticker..)

But it seems that an average external USB3.1 conventional SATA-600 disk would win this competition by a good margin both in terms of write speed and cost. (assuming top USB3.1 performance)

But don't take my word for it just yet. Might be factors that I don't know about. (e.g. frequent read operations in between, that may favor an SSD after all)

The statement seen around, "you need a big and fast SSD for planetary imaging", might me a bit of a misconception, and you could save a lot when going for huge storage.

Doing a check was worthwhile for me. At times I go to dark sites in the mountains, using two or three setups at the same time (most DSO, some planetary), one laptop for each mount, and one at a field table for remoting.

No need to give the "dumb" mount-laptops unnecessarily expensive hardware :)